Should we go to Mars, or Europa first with a manned mission?

Question

Since we hope to find life on either place, which is a better choice?

Answer 1

There is more to a manned mission than just picking a place out of a hat. Mars is a lot closer to us than is Europa. Also, Europa is a satellite in the Jovian satellite belt, which is a pretty weird neighborhood. Third, the evidence for something we can recognize as life seems more convincing for Mars than for Europa. Fourth, if I were king of the Universe (or at least the solar system), I'd go to Titan.

Answer 2

In 1990 they predicted that a software culminating in a manned venture to Mars might value approximately $450 billion over 20 to 30 years. NASA's annual funds is at present around $17 billion. There are additionally deep cuts planned for 2014. a very good kind of NASA's funds is spend on planetary technology and different study, so the investment basically isn't there. A manned venture to Jupiter's moons is punctiliously out of the question, in spite of the undeniable fact that. The trip time and the gas mandatory to get there is far previous the scope of a Mars venture, and getting returned delivers extra problems. A Mars venture might contain putting up a habitat whilst production gas for the return trip. No such threat with Jupiter, and the radiation might additionally be extra risky.

Answer 3

Neither.

We should spend the billions here on earth solving humanity's pressing problems. When we've learned to survive in peace, feed our population, and not destroy the environment, then we can go cause problems on other worlds.

Answer 4

Back to the moon first, then Mars.

Answer 5

We should go to the moon first. This time without the aid Hollywood!

Answer 6

We don't have to go there to look for life, we already know that there is no life, at least not intelligent life. We have to look much further for life.